Where does the stork come into all of this?

It's about sex. 

And babies. But babies have a lot to do with sex. Usually. 

A piece of legislation concerning the regulation of "gestational carrier arrangements" is awaiting its third and final hearing in both the House and the Senate before legislators vote. And the Minnesota Catholic Conference is hoping it fails to pass.

The bill (SF 2956 / HF 3448) addresses legal parentage of children born as a result of in vitro fertilization. The church teaches against in vitro fertilization, and so local Catholic leaders oppose the bill. The problem is that in vitro fertilization (or "artificial reproduction") separates the creation of a child from the act of sex. And you just can't do that.

Archbishop Nienstedt wrote about the church's position on in vitro fertilization in his Nov. 2, 2007, column in The Catholic Spirit.

Couples who cannot conceive on their own may look to in vitro fertilization as a way to have a child. However, the process is morally problematic in two ways: 1) the aforementioned separation of sex from the act of reproduction (The couple's ova and sperm are united outside of the body in a laboratory) and 2) the process usually results in more than one embryo (read "itty bitty human being"), thus leaving the parents the decision to throw away or indefinitely freeze their offspring that they do not plan to bring to full term.

This is a tough issue, though, and one that should be handled with compassion, as couples who are engaging in his procedure are doing it because they so desire to be parents. However, Archbishop Nienstedt points out that children are a gift from God, and nobody has a "right" to them. Also, couples who desire children have the option of adopting children, which is a beautiful, selfless act.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoting from the Vatican document Donum Vitae, (Instruction on respect for human life in its origin and on the dignity of procreation) asserts:

"Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus) are gravely immoral. These techniques infringe on the child's right to be born of a father and mother known to him, and bound to each other by marriage…”

Archbishop Nienstedt (who did his doctoral thesis on bioethics) isn't the only one speaking out on this. Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston also addressed this same topic in a 2004 pastoral letter:

“The plight of a couple who have difficulties in conceiving a child is something that concerns the Church community. We are pleased that the scientific community has developed some morally acceptable procedures that assist the conjugal act and not replace it… and Natural Family Planning techniques that allow couples to know when they have the best chance of conceiving.

"Given the Biblical injunction to care for widows and orphans and to welcome strangers, the childless couple might in the spirit of our faith consider adopting a child. It is a decision that should be made after prayer and reflection… Those who embrace the Gospel of Life must be enthusiastic supporters of adoption.”

MCC is also concerned about the Senate's version of the bill substituting the term "partner" for "husband" and "wife." "This change would undermine not only the sanctity of marriage but the reality of marriage as we have defined it these past 2,000 years," MCC said in a statement.